Should Lois Lane Learn Clark Kent's Secret?

[Blacksun]

Like most things, it really depends on the story and who is writing what.

It used to be that League members were trained in mental defenses to protect themselves from mental attacks. Not that every Leaguer became a psychic or anything, but they were taught how to detect invasive mental probes and put up mental blocks to protect delicate information. Not a foolproof solution to the threat of powerful telepaths and mages, but better than being defenseless. Sort of like how Batman uses "Tibetan meditation techniques" to overcome hypnosis and stuff.

I assume that's no longer a thing, since J'onn isnt on the League and Clark seemed to be completely at the mercy of Queen Bee and Hector Hammond (granted, they're some of the most powerful minds on earth so you gotta cut Clark some slack there, but still).

It's more believable if they use anti-telepathic devices, because the number of people who know the secret and the chance that not everybody can learn how to block telepathic attacks would put the secret ID on danger easily.
there's also magic...

[The World]

I think Superman is his best self all the time because he keeps his two lives separate and protected. Superman relies on Clark Kent as a grounding and restorative part of his life, which he would lose if his identity was made public.

First things first, I'm not saying I think he should go public with his identity. But Superman and Clark Kent are one in the same he could still stay just as grounded while going public. He could still have a relationship with Lois, and still be friends with Cat/Jimmy/etc, and enjoy all the other aspects of regular human life a fair number of characters do it and just roll with the consequences. He technically could and would be Clark Kent just with people having a different perception of him.

It doesn't make sense for any of those Marvel characters to have secret identities. Almost none of them have established characters outside of their superhero personas and they don't have secret identities in the comics either.

Some of them did though and they eventually dropped them because they weren't huge factors them being viewed as relatable or enjoyable. Same reason there's no more Donald Blake in Thor or Iron Man being Stark's bodygaurd. Again not saying they should but there's no reason to believe it couldn't work either.

[Punisher007]

The only real problem with the secret ID's are that the people closest to the heroes tend to have to be written as being stupid just so that they won't figure it out. Lois SHOULD be able to figure out that Clark is Superman, as should Perry. Gordon SHOULD be able to figure out that Bruce Wayne is Batman, and so on. And there's really no good reason, either in-story or out, that the COULDN'T know. The fact that DC likes to push these people as otherwise being really smart only makes this contradiction worse.

[Superlad93]

First things first, I'm not saying I think he should go public with his identity. But Superman and Clark Kent are one in the same he could still stay just as grounded while going public. He could still have a relationship with Lois, and still be friends with Cat/Jimmy/etc, and enjoy all the other aspects of regular human life a fair number of characters do it and just roll with the consequences. He technically could and would be Clark Kent just with people having a different perception of him.

That different perception is the whole point. He would no longer be Clark Kent the human in any sense of the word. Sure he'd still be a great person and whatnot, but no longer would he have the genuine anonymity of being just another person like he has as Clark. And no longer would Superman reflect the idea that we as people must put on that "normal" socially acceptable face to go to our 9 to 5. The idea that in all of us even the most unassuming lives something more robust and beautiful. You take that away and you do in fact take away a great chunk of his touch stone to the reader. It's not about losing his "humanity" or whatever nonsense people seem to tack on to it. It's about losing that beautiful contradiction that Zeus and the kings of old had. It wouldn't thematically work for Superman and what part of his myth is.

Let me be clear, I'm not saying that logically Superman couldn't do away with his secret ID and still live a great life and be a hero etc. Logically that works fine. But logically Superman should lobotomize Lex. That doesn't mean it would work for the character though. Again it's more that it goes against the myth and a big point of the character core make up. At some point you will have lost the character.

[Punisher007]

Or it'd just be actually PROGRESSING things and doing something new instead of obsessively clinging to the status quo and telling the same types of stories over and over and over again ad nauseum. So it really comes down to your perspective on things.

[Flash Gordon]

That different perception is the whole point. He would no longer be Clark Kent the human in any sense of the word. Sure he'd still be a great person and whatnot, but no longer would he have the genuine anonymity of being just another person like he has as Clark. And no longer would Superman reflect the idea that we as people must put on that "normal" socially acceptable face to go to our 9 to 5. The idea that in all of us even the most unassuming lives something more robust and beautiful. You take that away and you do in fact take away a great chunk of his touch stone to the reader. It's not about losing his "humanity" or whatever nonsense people seem to tack on to it. It's about losing that beautiful contradiction that Zeus and the kings of old had. It wouldn't thematically work for Superman and what part of his myth is.

Let me be clear, I'm not saying that logically Superman couldn't do away with his secret ID and still live a great life and be a hero etc. Logically that works fine. But logically Superman should lobotomize Lex. That doesn't mean it would work for the character though. Again it's more that it goes against the myth and a big point of the character core make up. At some point you will have lost the character.

Was going to add my two cents, but Superlad already answered for me.

So yeah, what he said.

[The Kid]

Though to be honest aren't secret identities pointless cliches in and of themselves? Isn't that what we've learned from the Marvel movies or the recent X-men movies? Thor, Cap, Tony, Widow, Hawkeye, Hulk none of them bothered with S.I. nor do they lead normal lives and not once has the general audience whined or complained about the absence of that trope, if anything it just allows the character to be their best selves all the time without being dishonest which I think resonates with the general audience. I'm not necessarily even saying they should do that with Superman but you can't deny the level of success it has had for their films which touches a much wider audience than the comics.

Overall, I don't care much for the secret identity trope but I make an exception for Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man. Those three need the secret identity part. Guys like Cap and Iron Man don't need it. In the case of Cap, it'd make no sense that no one knows who he is considering he was an American icon for 60+ years while frozen in ice

[rhymeswithparc]

Some of them did though and they eventually dropped them because they weren't huge factors them being viewed as relatable or enjoyable. Same reason there's no more Donald Blake in Thor or Iron Man being Stark's bodygaurd. Again not saying they should but there's no reason to believe it couldn't work either.

They had secret identities but have done away with them for the better part of the last decade if not more. That's because secret identities for those characters mean almost nothing. They are not regular people in their daily life; they aren't as relatable as characters with traditional secret identities nor did their identities introduce a layer of complexity to their character. It was done away with because it had no effect on them as characters. This isn't the case with Superman. Superman can't go around being meek Clark Kent while fighting off alien dictators. Instead of him being ignored, the spotlight will always be on him as he is the principal superhero in that universe.

I think it would be fine if they did it (they can do anything if they wanted) but it would completely change the dynamic of that character. It wouldn't be something minor or akin to the Marvel characters.

[Ascended]

It's more believable if they use anti-telepathic devices, because the number of people who know the secret and the chance that not everybody can learn how to block telepathic attacks would put the secret ID on danger easily.
there's also magic...

True. Well, this was back in the day when the list of people who knew who Superman was could be counted on one hand, with fingers left over, and this included the superhuman community as well. So it made more sense then. Over half the people who knew were also in the League getting the same kind of training, and the civilians who knew were largely protected by ambiguity; people like the Kents no one would ever have reason to bother.

Oh, and magic intrusion was taught as well. When it comes to mental domination, magic and telepathy were treated as being largely the same in execution, so with a few adjustments psychic training would work (at least to a degree) against magical intrusion as well.

But again, there was very little consistency to this back then and different writers would use or ignore it to suit their purposes.

[Blacksun]

First things first, I'm not saying I think he should go public with his identity. But Superman and Clark Kent are one in the same he could still stay just as grounded while going public. He could still have a relationship with Lois, and still be friends with Cat/Jimmy/etc, and enjoy all the other aspects of regular human life a fair number of characters do it and just roll with the consequences. He technically could and would be Clark Kent just with people having a different perception of him.

It's easier using the clark kent ID

True. Well, this was back in the day when the list of people who knew who Superman was could be counted on one hand, with fingers left over, and this included the superhuman community as well. So it made more sense then. Over half the people who knew were also in the League getting the same kind of training, and the civilians who knew were largely protected by ambiguity; people like the Kents no one would ever have reason to bother.

Oh, and magic intrusion was taught as well. When it comes to mental domination, magic and telepathy were treated as being largely the same in execution, so with a few adjustments psychic training would work (at least to a degree) against magical intrusion as well.

But again, there was very little consistency to this back then and different writers would use or ignore it to suit their purposes.

yeah it's up to writers decide if it will work or not.

[DochaDocha]

She should learn it, but I generally prefer the stories in which she doesn't know. As such, it's tricky to pick the right time when she finds out.

All-Star Superman did it pretty well, though it had the right constraint: it was an end of Superman story, so it had no time to dilly dally with hiding the secret.

[Heasensy32]

Sure I'd like it if Lois learnt about Clark's powers. Provided its done well of course.



So dating a normal human is to limiting but having them for a friend (Bruce) or enemy (Lex) isn't?

Accept they can achieve more than Lois can on a intellectual and influential level. Plus they are fighters, fighter that are good enough to take on his enemies and the man himself.

[Jon Clark]

I don't object to her learning it eventually, but I think we need to see the Lois/Clark relationship developed more before we get to that point. It's a complaint I had with the marriage in the 90's- on the one hand I get that we've seen 75+ years of Lois and Clark but on the other large portions of those interactions are with different versions of them. I want to see some real history for the post-Flashpoint versions before we change the parameters. Give us a few years of Lois not being in on the secret, and by that I mean real on-panel time not issues where we see Lois for an eyeblink, before she gets definitive proof.

[Blacksun]

Accept they can achieve more than Lois can on a intellectual and influential level. Plus they are fighters, fighter that are good enough to take on his enemies and the man himself.

Luthor is not a fighter, and not all problems can be solved with brute force. For me friendship and love has nothing to do with who is more intellectual, lois is a better journalist than clark/superman

I don't object to her learning it eventually, but I think we need to see the Lois/Clark relationship developed more before we get to that point. It's a complaint I had with the marriage in the 90's- on the one hand I get that we've seen 75+ years of Lois and Clark but on the other large portions of those interactions are with different versions of them. I want to see some real history for the post-Flashpoint versions before we change the parameters. Give us a few years of Lois not being in on the secret, and by that I mean real on-panel time not issues where we see Lois for an eyeblink, before she gets definitive proof.

That could be nice; lois was barely developped on new 52.

[misslane]

Accept they can achieve more than Lois can on a intellectual and influential level. Plus they are fighters, fighter that are good enough to take on his enemies and the man himself.

I think it's wrong to assume that a brilliant and fearless investigative journalist can't be as influential as a superhero. If Lois, for example, was able to use journalism to impeach a corrupt President or prevent a genocide, then those would be highly notable achievements. Further reducing this to an issue of who can "take on" who in a fight is more unfortunate. You can't seriously be saying that Superman would feel limited in a relationship with Lois because she can't beat him up?